CSTUF
Price
$11.79
Change
+$0.39 (+3.42%)
Updated
Jan 16 closing price
Capitalization
N/A
GLAC
Price
$10.78
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 31, 10:30 AM (EDT)
Capitalization
91.55M
Ad is loading...

CSTUF vs GLAC

Header iconCSTUF vs GLAC Comparison
Open Charts CSTUF vs GLACBanner chart's image
Constellation Acquisition Corp I
Price$11.79
Change+$0.39 (+3.42%)
Volume$300
CapitalizationN/A
Global Lights Acquisition
Price$10.78
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$2.42K
Capitalization91.55M
CSTUF vs GLAC Comparison Chart
Loading...
CSTUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CSTUF vs. GLAC commentary
Jan 31, 2025

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is CSTUF is a Hold and GLAC is a StrongBuy.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 31, 2025
Stock price -- (CSTUF: $11.79 vs. GLAC: $10.78)
Brand notoriety: CSTUF and GLAC are both not notable
Both companies represent the Financial Conglomerates industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CSTUF: 41% vs. GLAC: 0%
Market capitalization -- CSTUF: $0 vs. GLAC: $91.55M
CSTUF [@Financial Conglomerates] is valued at $0. GLAC’s [@Financial Conglomerates] market capitalization is $91.55M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Financial Conglomerates] industry ranges from $590.24B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Financial Conglomerates] industry is $3.25B.

Long-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).

CSTUF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGLAC’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • CSTUF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • GLAC’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, CSTUF is a better buy in the long-term than GLAC.

Short-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.

If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.

CSTUF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • CSTUF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 0 bearish.

Price Growth

CSTUF (@Financial Conglomerates) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while GLAC (@Financial Conglomerates) price change was +0.56% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Financial Conglomerates industry was +0.50%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.54%, and the average quarterly price growth was +32.91%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Financial Conglomerates (+0.50% weekly)

Financial conglomerates usually encompass a wide range of financial services including (not necessarily limited to) investment banking, insurance, capital raising/underwriting, trading of financial securities, investment advisory services, wealth management of high net-worth individuals, and retail banking. Think Citigroup, American Express Company, ING Group.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CSTUF YTD gains are higher at: 3.421 vs. GLAC (1.126).
CSTUFGLACCSTUF / GLAC
CapitalizationN/A91.5M-
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD3.4211.126304%
P/E RatioN/A5.56-
RevenueN/AN/A-
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total DebtN/AN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GLAC: Fundamental Ratings
GLAC
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
1
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
62
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
78
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
52
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50

Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CSTUFGLAC
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
4%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
6%
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
83%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 24 days ago
7%
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
80%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CSTUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
MREGX14.810.18
+1.23%
BlackRock Unconstrained Equity R
JGMIX25.690.29
+1.14%
Janus Henderson Triton S
ANTMX9.950.08
+0.81%
American Century Intl Sm-Md Cp G
ASQGX16.900.12
+0.72%
American Century Small Company R5
PAIOX8.21N/A
N/A
PGIM Jennison Intl Sm-Md Cap Opps R6

GLAC and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GLAC and TRTLF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GLAC and TRTLF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GLAC
1D Price
Change %
GLAC100%
+0.28%
TRTLF - GLAC
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
VMCA - GLAC
25%
Poorly correlated
+0.27%
FGCO - GLAC
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NETD - GLAC
16%
Poorly correlated
-0.00%
AITR - GLAC
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More